russbarnes

russbarnes

Joined on Jun 9, 2010

Comments

Total: 118, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On Nikon issues service advisory on D600's dust issue article (240 comments in total)
In reply to:

Picturenaut: I'd really suggest DPR to amend their reviews with a production quality rating that's updated regularly. Pretty sure that some glorious gold award material would be less shiny after a while.

It's a real pity with Nikon nowadays. We really want to update the D300 in our Nikon gear at home. But this (once highly praised) camera makes enough trouble, so we are not prepared to risk any more annoyance. D800? AF issues. D600? Smeared sensors. In fact, our D300 proved to be much more prone to dirt on the sensor than our Canon DSLRs.

Looks like the old times of superior quality cameras from Nikon such as the legendary FM series are definitely over (we still have 3 FM-2 bodies, one worked even in the Siberian at -40 °C without any trouble). Currently I really prefer my Canon DSLRs with their less fancy sensors (in terms of DXO) because they simply do what they have to do without any smearing or snorting around.

Scott, ALL of your comments are the most naive utterly deluded words in this whole thread. Thanks for the laughs.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 25, 2013 at 07:51 UTC
On Nikon issues service advisory on D600's dust issue article (240 comments in total)
In reply to:

Joed700: Nikon definitely has taking steps backward in terms of QC among other things. The last and most decent release of FX DSLRs were D700 and D3X in my opinion. The current D800s LCD screens have a greenish yellow tone, which makes one wonder why the D700 and D3xs were better even they are older models. Also, the jpegs on the D800s were not exactly perfect either in term of colors. If cutting back is their big motive, I wouldn't mind paying a little extra to get something at least as good as the D700 or D3x. Nikon, shame on you!

Honestly the crap that gets peddled on this website is laughable. There is nothing wrong with the D800s LCD - and you clearly don't own one. As for JPEGs, they can be adjusted to do anything. My D800 is perfect on both counts. The build of the D800 is identical to my D700 but the output made the D700 look like an amateur toy. The sensor in the D800 made the D3X irrelevant overnight too - a camera that is still selling at £4000 which is a joke.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 23, 2013 at 07:00 UTC
On Nikon issues service advisory on D600's dust issue article (240 comments in total)
In reply to:

Justin Francis: Little wonder that Nikon's profit is going downhill.

But it isn't. Please take your endless trolling comments elsewhere...

Direct link | Posted on Feb 23, 2013 at 06:55 UTC
On Nikon issues service advisory on D600's dust issue article (240 comments in total)
In reply to:

Kite Kraemer: Too little, too late. I didn't want to switch back to Canon, but I'm glad I did --their customer service is great!

lol. If Canon had a decent alternative you wouldn't be using their Customer Service. Nice attempt to troll, but you failed miserably ;)

Direct link | Posted on Feb 23, 2013 at 06:51 UTC
On Just Posted: Nikon D600 In-depth Review article (498 comments in total)
In reply to:

VivaLasVegas: D600 needs a portable blow drier and a wit swab handy every 100 shots.
By the 25th shot, you can't step down beyond f8 because the oil/dust will be prominent, unless you have a wit swab in handy. For a camera to score 87%, that is only usable in bright day light and a struggle in low light situation compared to D800 is crazy. While both has useless outer AF pts. in low light scenarios, D800 can acquire focus. But then again, D800 needs a solid tripod + ballhead with a wind velocity less than 3mph. You just can't win, pick your poison.

What do you expect of a serial Canon troll who does nothing more than post crap like this? He hates the fact Nikon's sensors run rings round his dear Rebel, he's never even touched a full frame camera, all he knows how to do is write drivel.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 14, 2012 at 19:33 UTC
On Just Posted: Nikon D600 In-depth Review article (498 comments in total)
In reply to:

fdfgdfgdgf: I have checked the RAW ISO vs 5D3 its seems that 5D3 is better at one stop over the D600.

Why DPR concludes with "Outstanding low and high ISO performance in both JPEG and Raw files" and not just very good?

"Outstanding" as being related to which peer full frame camera?

Why not compare it to the 1DX or D4 while you're at it? It's a stupid comparison, unless you want to talk about the £1000 price difference between the D600 and 5DIII too. Or did you forget aout that? If you want to compare at ISO12800 which almost no one uses then you will find a small difference. The important performance is at ISO 100-800 where the D600's sensor makes a camera like the 5DIII look grossly over-priced, image quality is surpassed...

Direct link | Posted on Nov 13, 2012 at 20:26 UTC
On Just Posted: Six page Nikon D5200 hands-on preview article (113 comments in total)
In reply to:

russbarnes: It's clear that more and more that even these lowly offerings from Nikon look better than cameras many times their price from Canon. I'm willing to bet the image quality out of this is BETTER than the grossly overpriced 5DIII. Wait a couple of months and the 5200 will look like an incredible bargain...

Wow, you're truly a gear sucker Edward. If you can't make a high quality artistic image with a camera like the 5200 with a latest sensor, you need some photography lessons. I run some workshops you might want to sign up to... What is even funnier is you appear to shoot with the Canon 7D. Do you also believe that you could tell the side by side difference between that and the 5DIII? lol. I suggest you save your money if you're thinking about upgrading.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 10, 2012 at 18:06 UTC
On Just Posted: Six page Nikon D5200 hands-on preview article (113 comments in total)
In reply to:

russbarnes: It's clear that more and more that even these lowly offerings from Nikon look better than cameras many times their price from Canon. I'm willing to bet the image quality out of this is BETTER than the grossly overpriced 5DIII. Wait a couple of months and the 5200 will look like an incredible bargain...

I beg to differ. I'm ready and willing to take that challenge - I bet I can produce a real world image from a 5200 and a 5DIII from an idenical scene and no one on here will be able to tell the difference.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 10, 2012 at 04:44 UTC
On Just Posted: Six page Nikon D5200 hands-on preview article (113 comments in total)

It's clear that more and more that even these lowly offerings from Nikon look better than cameras many times their price from Canon. I'm willing to bet the image quality out of this is BETTER than the grossly overpriced 5DIII. Wait a couple of months and the 5200 will look like an incredible bargain...

Direct link | Posted on Nov 9, 2012 at 20:17 UTC as 19th comment | 6 replies
In reply to:

VivaLasVegas: D600 is 1000% PLASTICKY.......just stating facts.

He doesn't have a point. He chooses to spend his entire insecure existence as a serial silly little Canon troll who's been broken by the fact that Nikon's cameras combine with Sony sensors to make the best image quality out there in the DSLR world. Pity him instead ;)

Direct link | Posted on Nov 9, 2012 at 06:56 UTC
On Canon EF 24-70mm f/4L IS USM preview article (149 comments in total)
In reply to:

russbarnes: Incredible. Is there no limit to Canon's price gouging? It would seem not, this is meant to be a consumer lens to help sales of the poor 6D? What a joke. The pricing on display shows the breath-taking arrogance Canon has and the total belief that its once loyal customer base has unlimited pockets and will buy any old crap they put out there. I predict a lonely future for Canon, their products fail to innovate, Nikon, Fuji and Sony are positively running rings around them and their financial performance has been abysmal to boot. Could Canon be the next giant to fall in the consumer world? It's looking more and more likely, no one is immune these days. When you start increasing prices and delivering product that's a step behind the rest of the market it's time to start asking some serious questions about the entire leadership of the business. Thank the lord everyone has the amazing choice of pretty much ANY of the other brands out there just now.

Marike - it's an f/4 zoom which puts it into consumer category without question. Even DPR seem to be saying that this is intended to be a kit lens for the 6D. Who am I to argue, usually an f/4 zoom wouldn't exceed the price of an f/2.8 variant on any other planet, but on Planet Canon, absolutely any price now seems plausible to them on every release it seems. It's like they're playing a game of "who blinks first" with all of their customer base.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 7, 2012 at 13:54 UTC
On Canon EF 24-70mm f/4L IS USM preview article (149 comments in total)

Incredible. Is there no limit to Canon's price gouging? It would seem not, this is meant to be a consumer lens to help sales of the poor 6D? What a joke. The pricing on display shows the breath-taking arrogance Canon has and the total belief that its once loyal customer base has unlimited pockets and will buy any old crap they put out there. I predict a lonely future for Canon, their products fail to innovate, Nikon, Fuji and Sony are positively running rings around them and their financial performance has been abysmal to boot. Could Canon be the next giant to fall in the consumer world? It's looking more and more likely, no one is immune these days. When you start increasing prices and delivering product that's a step behind the rest of the market it's time to start asking some serious questions about the entire leadership of the business. Thank the lord everyone has the amazing choice of pretty much ANY of the other brands out there just now.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 6, 2012 at 11:19 UTC as 56th comment | 5 replies
On Hands-on with the AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/4G ED VR article (258 comments in total)
In reply to:

(unknown member): meh......

Yes, yet another reason to shoot full frame with Nikon and leave Canon behind. I can understand why you would find that very difficult to take Ape :)

Direct link | Posted on Oct 26, 2012 at 18:00 UTC
On Hands-on with Nikon V2 article (455 comments in total)
In reply to:

VivaLasVegas: This is my third day looking at this latest release in hopes of purging my intial easthics impression. No change, it is such a fugly piece of plastic, sorry. Its getting uglier everyday I look at it.

Why do you personally care Viva? After all you are a self confessed silly little Canon troll and a VERY boring one at that. You don't even troll in an amusing way, you can't spell and that speaks volumes about your trailer park education. The word you were looking for is "aesthetics" :)

Direct link | Posted on Oct 26, 2012 at 06:44 UTC
In reply to:

VivaLasVegas: This glass is longer, heavier compared to EF counterpart, with so much more glass elements only to have a so-so mtf chart, this is not good. What.....the collar cost $$$, I knew it, that five step VR designation was a way to price gouge the consumers.

The MTF charts make the Canon equivalent look positively soft by comparison - this new Nikon will be killer corner to corner, especially at 200mm. You need to actually learn how to read those charts if you're going to troll properly fool :)

Direct link | Posted on Oct 25, 2012 at 05:18 UTC
In reply to:

thx1138: Pathetic value IMO, given the f/2.8 version gets the tripod collar as standard. I paid only $300 more for the Canon 70-200 f/2.8L IS mk II.

Wonder if this lens shares the woeful maximum magnification of the Nikon f/2.8 II version?

Its price will fall quickly after release. I never understand why so much attention is put on the release price.

As for the 70-200 2.8 VRII, it's a spectacular lens - I doubt you've actually used it at all given the amount of Canon gear you own.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 25, 2012 at 05:13 UTC
In reply to:

(unknown member): meh...

Yes, yet another reason to shoot full frame with Nikon and leave Canon behind. I can understand why you would find that very difficult to take Ape :)

Direct link | Posted on Oct 25, 2012 at 05:05 UTC
In reply to:

Lucas_: Why wait if you can have it all with an A99 in a couple of weeks and for a lower price?
I know, it comes from a house appliance and Pro video manufacturer..., which coincidentally is making the best image sensors in the world and most camera manufacturers ( but Canon... ) are buying them! Also, you have lots invested in other mounts' lenses. Well, good luck then!

You can't have it all though. No OVF, no great lens choices, these are the things that matter to most photographers at present.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 23, 2012 at 18:32 UTC
In reply to:

HenryTt: My wife purchased a 5D3 over the D800. They are obviously both top notch cameras. However, she felt the 5D3 was a more functional camera for use outside the studio (and not landscape). However, the D600 has given her pause and made us feel like we made a mistake in going with Canon. Here's why:
First, the D600 is a lot of camera for the money. I think the sensor is slightly better, and otherwise, the camera is 95% as good as the 5D3 for a lot less money.
Second, Nikon seems to have upped its game. One reason why my wife chose Canon was that they have a history of being at the leading edge while Nikon always played it safe. (Example, that 12MP is enough cr@p)
Third, Canon seems to be really bad at playing catchup. This firmware is an example of a half-ass attempt at rectifying some of their errors.

These firmware changes are a welcome update. But Canon needs to: A) lower the price to $3000. B) Put out the firmware sooner. C) I'd like to see better auto ISO handling.

I can't argue with much of what you've written, except for the 12MP part. I recently had to get a 3rd party to produce a one-off 3m x 2m print at 240dpi from a 12MP D700 file which I interpolated myself and the result was staggering. I mean really incredible. So despite choosing to shoot with the D800 these days myself, actually Nikon's line all long was spot on in my view - 12MP on a full frame camera is enough to produce incredible results even beyond 120 x 80 inches in print, you don't need more - it's the marketing spiel of manufacturers like Canon that pushed the MP race and now they are behind they are claiming the sweet spot is 20MP. What a surprise.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 23, 2012 at 18:30 UTC

He shows great technique with a fantastic camera and lens combo. He gets low with the 14-24 which makes the world look very cool. A magnificent camera and lens in the hands of someone who whether others like it or not is now a living legend. Bolt will be talked about in 50 years.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 11, 2012 at 11:44 UTC as 43rd comment
Total: 118, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »